The 2017 French Law on the Duty of Vigilance of Parent and Lead Companies has been hailed as a pioneering national legislation to hold corporations accountable for human rights and environmental abuses. Most lawsuits brought under this law have faced a plethora of admissibility objections, and so far, only one case has resulted in a decision on the merits. Initial formalistic court decisions on admissibility have now been mostly dismissed. However, critical questions around the role and powers entrusted to judges under the law remain contested.

There has been tremendous momentum in adoption of business and human rights regulations, specifically national legislation that mandate human rights due diligence. While these laws have been heralded as the torchbearers of progress, this article approaches national legislation on business and human rights by placing them in context of a North–South divide through a Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL) lens. It looks at the form of regulation of transnational corporations (national/international) – not the substance – and illustrates the neo-colonial flavour of these laws by diving into the narrative behind the adoption of the French devoir de vigilance law. It illustrates that the French law can also be read as an attempt to universalise European values while reinforcing power hierarchies. The claim of this article is that national legislation cannot be a substitute for a treaty but only a path towards one, because national legislation structurally lacks means to take the Global South participation seriously.